In theory. Probably but I can't remember one instance that a professional team has ever had to do that.

Many colleges but no pro teams.

_________________“If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it.”-Stephen Colbert-

NEW ORLEANS -- The U.S. Attorney's Office in the Eastern District of Louisiana was told Friday that New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis had an electronic device in his Superdome suite that had been secretly re-wired to enable him to eavesdrop on visiting coaching staffs for nearly three NFL seasons, "Outside the Lines" has learned.

Thats "spygate" (1/2 million dollar fine and loss of MORe draft picks) type stuff if true...

That's far worse that Spygate. Illegal use of electronic monitoring devices is a felony on the federal level. Loomis could go to the big house for several years if he is found guilty.

The Saints aren't quite so saintly anymore.

April 23rd, 2012, 7:14 pm

Killwill25

Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: March 5th, 2009, 8:42 pmPosts: 2422Location: Brooklyn, NY

Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”

Watching the Saints get punished so severely is something I will cherish forever. Hopefully the party is just getting started

Watching the Saints get punished so severely is something I will cherish forever. Hopefully the party is just getting started

I'm waiting to see how they deal with the player punishments. They'll have to spread them out during the year just to allow them to field a defense. Meanwhile...

Different, but related to the Saints and cheating (and I didn't want to start a new thread)...

The Detroit News wrote:

April 23, 2012 at 7:22 pmSaints deny report they could eavesdrop on opponents in Superdome

Mickey Loomis was promoted to general manager of the Saints in 2002. (Seth Wenig / Associated Press)

New Orleans — The New Orleans Saints denied an anonymously sourced ESPN report on Monday which alleges that general manager Mickey Loomis' booth in the Superdome was wired so he could listen to opposing coaches' radio communications during games.

ESPN could not determine if the system was ever used. The report on Monday's "Outside the Lines" said Loomis would have been able to eavesdrop on opponents from 2002 to 2004. The report also said the system was disabled in 2005, when the Superdome was heavily damaged by Hurricane Katrina.

Saints spokesman Greg Bensel called the report "1000 percent false."

"We asked ESPN to provide us evidence to support their allegations and they refused," Bensel said. "The team and Mickey are seeking all legal recourse regarding these false allegations."

If the Saints had installed a system allowing them to listen in on their opponents it would have violated NFL rules and also could have infringed on federal wire-tapping laws.

"We were not aware of it," league spokesman Greg Aiello said. "We have no knowledge of the allegations."

FBI spokeswoman Sheila Thorne said the agency's New Orleans office was aware of the situation, but wouldn't comment further.

U.S. Attorney Jim Letten in New Orleans also said his office had been told about "general allegations" involving the Saints and possible wiretapping, but he did not elaborate. Letten declined to discuss who made the allegations, and whether they involved Loomis or any other Saints officials.

For the Saints, the report in itself added to a slew of recent bad publicity, which began in early March when the NFL released a report describing a crunch-for-cash bounty system that provided improper cash bonuses to defensive players who delivered hits that hobbled targeted opponents.

Commissioner Roger Goodell has suspended head coach Sean Payton for the entire 2012 season in connection with the bounty probe. Loomis, who did not comment directly on the latest report, was suspended for the first half of the regular season and assistant head coach Joe Vitt was suspended six games.

The team also lost its second-round pick in this week's NFL draft and was fined $500,000. Goodell took away the Saints' second-round pick in 2013 as well, but has said he may lessen that punishment if he is satisfied with the club's cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

The NFL has yet to hand down punishment to between 22 and 27 current and former Saints defensive players whom the league has said participated in the bounty program.

The new Saints story about the GM is looking to me like it's probably not true. He's already come out and said emphatically that it's not true and never happened. For him to do that leads me to believe it's probably not true, because if he were to say something like that and then be found to actually be doing it, he'd be in even more trouble. He has nothing to gain by coming out so strongly against it if it is actually true.

Here's what Jay Glazer posted on twitter:

Just got an email from Mickey Loomis: "This report on ESPN is absolutely false. I have a monitor in front of me in my booth that provides the league issued stats for the game. I have a small tv with the network broadcast and I have an earpiece to listen to the WWL-AM radio (flagship broadcaster) game broadcast.

To think I am sitting in there listening and actually and or doing something with the offensive and defensive play calls of the opposing teams makes this story and the unnamed sources that provided the false information that much more less credible…it just didn’t happen."

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

April 24th, 2012, 9:55 am

TheRealWags

Megatron

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12521

Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

The new Saints story about the GM is looking to me like it's probably not true. He's already come out and said emphatically that it's not true and never happened.

Didn't he say the same thing about "Bounty Gate"? Just sayin'..........

The new Saints story about the GM is looking to me like it's probably not true. He's already come out and said emphatically that it's not true and never happened.

Didn't he say the same thing about "Bounty Gate"? Just sayin'..........

No I don't think he did. Besides, it's a different situation. On the bounties, he wasn't the one offering/making the bounties, and from what I understand he denied knowing about them. Whether he actually knew about it or not, I don't know. But, in this case it's a question of an accusation of something that he himself was doing, and he has come out and explicitly said that he was in no way doing that. There is a big difference. Knowledge of something someone else was doing is one thing. Actually doing something yourself is another.

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

April 24th, 2012, 10:16 am

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

TheRealWags wrote:

Touchdown Jesus wrote:

The new Saints story about the GM is looking to me like it's probably not true. He's already come out and said emphatically that it's not true and never happened.

Didn't he say the same thing about "Bounty Gate"? Just sayin'..........

No I don't think he did. Besides, it's a different situation. On the bounties, he wasn't the one offering/making the bounties, and from what I understand he denied knowing about them. Whether he actually knew about it or not, I don't know. But, in this case it's a question of an accusation of something that he himself was doing, and he has come out and explicitly said that he was in no way doing that. There is a big difference. Knowledge of something someone else was doing is one thing. Actually doing something yourself is another.

The other thing to remember is that the people making the accusations are "former" Saints and/or Superdome workers. It could be a case of trying to throw gas on the fire based purely on their being upset about having been fired, let go or otherwise.

Also, I don't know that a GM having that capability is going to have too much affect on the outcome of any game. Unless he is making notes of what he hears on each play, then goes back and reviews the game tape to correlate what was said with what the team did on that particular play, it can't affect the game.

Is it still illegal? Sure it is. From an NFL, as well as a Federal point of view. But I think it's just sour grapes from some former workers.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

The new Saints story about the GM is looking to me like it's probably not true. He's already come out and said emphatically that it's not true and never happened.

Didn't he say the same thing about "Bounty Gate"? Just sayin'..........

No I don't think he did. Besides, it's a different situation. On the bounties, he wasn't the one offering/making the bounties, and from what I understand he denied knowing about them. Whether he actually knew about it or not, I don't know. But, in this case it's a question of an accusation of something that he himself was doing, and he has come out and explicitly said that he was in no way doing that. There is a big difference. Knowledge of something someone else was doing is one thing. Actually doing something yourself is another.

The other thing to remember is that the people making the accusations are "former" Saints and/or Superdome workers. It could be a case of trying to throw gas on the fire based purely on their being upset about having been fired, let go or otherwise.

Also, I don't know that a GM having that capability is going to have too much affect on the outcome of any game. Unless he is making notes of what he hears on each play, then goes back and reviews the game tape to correlate what was said with what the team did on that particular play, it can't affect the game.

Is it still illegal? Sure it is. From an NFL, as well as a Federal point of view. But I think it's just sour grapes from some former workers.

Let's not be naive--if they didn't think it would provide an advantage, they wouldn't have done it in the first place. Hearing the language of particular play calls might not be immediately useful, but an eavesdropper might hear conversation that's immediately useful to the coaches. If the opponents are talking broad game strategy, for example ("let's go no-huddle on the next drive," "let's blitz more," "double-cover that receiver"). Those kinds of statements could give the Saints an ability to anticipate what the opponents will do on an upcoming drive--even if they don't hear particular play calls.

And even the play calls could be useful in future games. This was the case with "Spygate." The Patriots weren't using the footage to gain an advantage during that particular game--rather they were using it to help prepare for the next time they faced that opponent.

_________________Proud member of the Contract Extension for Schwartz Fan Club.

April 24th, 2012, 11:38 am

m2karateman

RIP Killer

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pmPosts: 10408Location: Where ever I'm at now

Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”

mwill2 wrote:

Let's not be naive--if they didn't think it would provide an advantage, they wouldn't have done it in the first place. Hearing the language of particular play calls might not be immediately useful, but an eavesdropper might hear conversation that's immediately useful to the coaches. If the opponents are talking broad game strategy, for example ("let's go no-huddle on the next drive," "let's blitz more," "double-cover that receiver"). Those kinds of statements could give the Saints an ability to anticipate what the opponents will do on an upcoming drive--even if they don't hear particular play calls.

And even the play calls could be useful in future games. This was the case with "Spygate." The Patriots weren't using the footage to gain an advantage during that particular game--rather they were using it to help prepare for the next time they faced that opponent.

The question is, did they even do it? I don't think so, based on the source of the accusations.

However, how would the GM pass that information down to the coach? The GM doesn't have a headset to speak with the coach. They don't have a direct line like the coordinators.

If they want to help prepare for future games, listening to play calls won't help, unless they tie it in with what play was called and what the team actually did in that situation. Then they'd have to be able to hear that call at the next game, pass that info down to the coaches, and have the coaches pass that onto the player....all in less than 20 seconds. Not likely.

As for general chatter...that's possible. But again, you are talking about in game information. That won't do them any good in future games.

The "spygate" situation was covered by the same rule: no electronic devices can be used during the course of the game to give one team an advantage over the other. Filming the signs given during the game CAN be used in that game. Signs and play calls will sometimes change from game to game. When a player is traded, cut, etc. the team often changes things up just so another team doesn't get that information. Same way a baseball team will change their signs from the 3rd bass coach. Often a key word is included, and that can change from drive to drive, let alone game to game.

As much as I dislike the Saints, I just don't think this is something that actually happened.

_________________I will not put on blinders when it comes to our QBs performances.

The question is, did they even do it? I don't think so, based on the source of the accusations.

However, how would the GM pass that information down to the coach? The GM doesn't have a headset to speak with the coach. They don't have a direct line like the coordinators.

If they want to help prepare for future games, listening to play calls won't help, unless they tie it in with what play was called and what the team actually did in that situation. Then they'd have to be able to hear that call at the next game, pass that info down to the coaches, and have the coaches pass that onto the player....all in less than 20 seconds. Not likely.

As for general chatter...that's possible. But again, you are talking about in game information. That won't do them any good in future games.

The "spygate" situation was covered by the same rule: no electronic devices can be used during the course of the game to give one team an advantage over the other. Filming the signs given during the game CAN be used in that game. Signs and play calls will sometimes change from game to game. When a player is traded, cut, etc. the team often changes things up just so another team doesn't get that information. Same way a baseball team will change their signs from the 3rd bass coach. Often a key word is included, and that can change from drive to drive, let alone game to game.

As much as I dislike the Saints, I just don't think this is something that actually happened.

Agreed. It just doesn't make any sense to me that he'd come out and deny this as strongly as he is if there was any chance it was true. If it were to come out that this is true after all this, he'd lose his job. It just doesn't seem to me that he has anything to gain by denying it like this if it were true. He'd be better off saying nothing and having his attorneys give some kind of standard legal statement about seeking out all legal options or something like that.

_________________"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson

April 24th, 2012, 4:19 pm

TheRealWags

Megatron

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 amPosts: 12521

Re: ***Bounty-Gate***

Player discipline has been handed out....this could get interesting....

PFT wrote:

Four suspended for Saints’ bounty program, Vilma for all of 2012Posted by Michael David Smith on May 2, 2012, 11:57 AM EDTvilma Getty Images

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has lowered the hammer on four New Orleans Saints players who were involved in the team’s bounty scandal, with Jonathan Vilma leading the way and getting one of the most significant suspensions in NFL history.

Vilma has been banished for all of 2012, effective immediately and through the Super Bowl, for his role in the bounty scandal. Vilma reportedly put $10,000 cash on the table in the team’s meeting room and said the cash would go to anyone who could knock Brett Favre out of the NFC Championship Game in January of 2010.

Anthony Hargrove, who’s now with the Packers, was given an eight-game suspension after the NFL said that he, too, targeted Favre in the NFC Championship Game. The NFL says that Hargrove eventually admitted his role in the team’s bounty program, but that at first “Hargrove also actively obstructed the league’s 2010 investigation into the program by being untruthful to investigators.”

Will Smith was suspended four games. The NFL says he worked with former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams in setting up the bounty program.

Browns linebacker Scott Fujita is no longer in New Orleans, but he was given a three-game suspension for his role in the bounty program when he played for the team.

“It is the obligation of everyone, including the players on the field, to ensure that rules designed to promote player safety, fair play, and the integrity of the game are adhered to and effectively and consistently enforced,” Goodell said in the league’s statement. “Respect for the men that play the game starts with the way players conduct themselves with each other on the field.”

Goodell has said he believes players were not just participants at the behest of Williams, but were actively encouraging and celebrating the bounties. The NFL Players’ Association has signaled that it does not agree with Goodell’s assessment. Vilma, Hargrove, Smith and Fujita all have the right to appeal.

The four players suspended today for their role in the Saints’ bounty scandal do not plan to accept their punishment without a fight.

Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma, Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove, Saints defensive end Will Smith and Browns linebacker Scott Fujita have all already decided that they will appeal. Vilma is suspended for all of 2012, Hargrove (who left the Saints after the 2010 season) has been suspended for the first eight games of the season, Smith has been suspended for the first four games and Fujita (who left the Saints after the 2009 season) has been suspended for the first three games.

The appeals were widely anticipated, but ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported that the players expect to go beyond the usual appeals process within the league office and instead expect to go to federal court.

“Get ready for a massive legal battle on many fronts,” Schefter quoted a source as saying.

The NFL’s announcement of the suspensions said that each player is entitled to appeal the decision within three days, and that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will hold a hearing at which the player may speak on his behalf and be represented by counsel. But all indications are that both the players and their union believe that they’ll be represented by counsel not only in front of Goodell, but also in front of a federal judge. This story is a long way from over.

Need our resident lawyers' help here....on what grounds do the players have a case???

_________________

Quote:

Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....

May 2nd, 2012, 12:59 pm

njroar

QB Coach - Brian Callahan

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 amPosts: 3233

Re: ***Bounty-Gate***

Not a lawyer, but they don't. They had a chance to give statements and none showed up. Hargrove only sent a single page letter. Lawyers will be involved because so much money is involved, but they're just going to try to get the proof to go public to see what the league really has, which could end up being more damning to the players.

The four players suspended today for their role in the Saints’ bounty scandal do not plan to accept their punishment without a fight.

Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma, Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove, Saints defensive end Will Smith and Browns linebacker Scott Fujita have all already decided that they will appeal. Vilma is suspended for all of 2012, Hargrove (who left the Saints after the 2010 season) has been suspended for the first eight games of the season, Smith has been suspended for the first four games and Fujita (who left the Saints after the 2009 season) has been suspended for the first three games.

The appeals were widely anticipated, but ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported that the players expect to go beyond the usual appeals process within the league office and instead expect to go to federal court.

“Get ready for a massive legal battle on many fronts,” Schefter quoted a source as saying.

The NFL’s announcement of the suspensions said that each player is entitled to appeal the decision within three days, and that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will hold a hearing at which the player may speak on his behalf and be represented by counsel. But all indications are that both the players and their union believe that they’ll be represented by counsel not only in front of Goodell, but also in front of a federal judge. This story is a long way from over.

Need our resident lawyers' help here....on what grounds do the players have a case???

Without actually reading their pleading, it's tough to predict (at least for me) what legal theory they'll rest their case on. They are in a players union though, and I believe everyone in the NFL is actually employed by the NFL (opposed to just being employed by the team), but even that structure is hard to parce out (and they may sue the Union itself if they don't properly stick up for them, but IMO that's unlikely... Unions seem to fight battles like this tooth and nail).

That said, it will probably be some employment law, discrimination suit centered around lack of evidence for the punishment, and what they would probably call an over-broad and overly harsh punishment.